Abundant research has found that men's economic status shapes their gender ideology such that men who are breadwinners are less likely to endorse egalitarian ideology than men in nontraditional arrangements. This article investigates how the association between men's breadwinning status and gender ideology is influenced by the institutional arrangements of different types of labor markets. Rigid labor markets support men's ability to be breadwinners in the long term, whereas flexible labor markets provide men with more frequent, but less permanent, experiences of nontraditional arrangements. The authors anticipate that breadwinner status will have stronger effects on men's gender ideology in rigid labor markets because men can expect less fluctuation in their employment situations in those contexts. Results from a multilevel analysis of 27 countries indeed demonstrate that individual men's economic dependency on their partners influences men's gender egalitarian ideology more strongly in rigid labor markets than in flexible markets.
Allmendinger, J.1989. Educational systems and labor market outcomes. European Sociological Review5:231-250.
2.
Alwin, D.F., M. Braun, and J. Scott.1992. The separation of work and family: Attitudes towards women's labour force participation in Germany, Great Britain and the United States. European Sociological Review8 (1): 13-36.
3.
Baxter, J., and E.W. Kane.1995. Dependence and independence: A cross-national analysis of gender inequality and gender attitudes. Gender & Society9:193-215.
4.
Bolzendahl, C.I., and D.J. Myers.2004. Feminist attitudes and support for gender equality: opinion change in women and men, 1974-1998. Social Forces83 (2): 759-90.
5.
Borchorst, A.1999. Feminist thinking about the welfare state. Revisioning gender. Walnut Creek, CA: Altamira .
6.
Brewster, K.L., and I. Padavic.2000. Change in gender-ideology, 1977-1996: The contributions of intracohort change and population turnover. Journal of Marriage and the Family62:477-87.
7.
Brines, J.1994. Economic dependency, gender, and the division of labor at home. American Journal of Sociology100:652-88.
8.
Chang, M.L.2000. The evolution of sex segregation regimes. American Journal of Sociology105:1658-1701.
9.
Charles, M., M. Buchmann, S. Halebsky, J.M. Powers, and M.M. Smith.2001. The context of women's market careers: A cross-national study. Work & Occupations28:371.
10.
Charles, M., and D.B. Grusky.2005. Occupational ghettos: the worldwide segregation of women and men. Social Forces84:1311-12.
11.
Clark, R., T.W. Ramsbey, and E.S. Adler.1991. Culture, gender and labor force participation: A cross national study. Gender & Society5 (1): 47-66.
12.
Coltrane, S.1996. Family man: fatherhood, housework, and gender equity . New York: Oxford University Press .
13.
Connell, R.W.1995. Masculinities. Berkeley: University of California Press.
14.
Crompton, R., and F. Harris.1997. Women's employment and gender attitudes: A comparative analysis of Britain, Norway and the Czech Republic. Acta Sociologica40 (2): 183-202.
15.
Deutsch, F.M., and S.E. Saxon.1998. Traditional ideologies, nontraditional lives. Sex Roles38 (5): 331-62.
16.
Doeringer, P.B., and M.J. Piore.1971. Internal labor markets and manpower analysis. Lexington, MA: D. C. Heath .
17.
Esping-Anderson, G.1990. The three worlds of welfare capitalism. Cambridge, UK: Polity.
18.
Estévez-Abe, M.2005. Gender bias in skills and social policies: The varieties of capitalism perspective on sex segregation. Social Politics: International Studies in Gender, State & Society12:180-215.
19.
Estévez-Abe, M., T. Iversen, and D. Soskice.2001. Social protection and the formation of skills: A reinterpretation of the welfare state. In Varieties of capitalism: The institutional foundations of comparative advantage, edited by P. A. Hall and D. Soskice.New York: Oxford University Press.
20.
Ferree, M.M.1990. Beyond separate spheres: feminism and family research . Journal of Marriage and the Family52:866-84.
21.
Gerson, K.1993. No man's land: Men's changing commitments to family and work. New York: Basic Books .
22.
Gornick, J.C., and M.K. Meyers.2003. Families that work: Policies for reconciling parenthood and employment. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
23.
Hochschild, A.R.2001. The time bind: When work becomes home and home becomes work. New York: Metropolitan Books .
24.
Hochschild, A.R., and A. Machung.2003. The second shift. New York: Penguin.
25.
Jackson, R.M.1998. Destined for equality: The inevitable rise of women's status. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
26.
Kane, E.W., and L. Sanchez.1994. Family status and criticism of gender inequality at home and work. Social Forces72 (4): 1079-1102.
27.
Kimmel, M.S.1993. What do men want?Harvard Business Review71(6): 50-59.
28.
Klasen, Stephan.2002. Low schooling for girls, slower growth for all? Cross-country evidence on the effect of gender inequality in education on economic development . World Bank Economic Review16 (3): 345-73.
29.
Knudsen, K., and K. Waerness.2001. National context, individual characteristics and attitudes on mothers' employment: A comparative analysis of Great Britain, Sweden and Norway. Acta Sociologica44 (1): 67-79.
30.
Lewis, J.1992. Gender and the development of welfare regimes. Journal of European Social Policy3:159-73.
31.
Mandel, H., and M. Semyonov.2006. A welfare state paradox: State interventions and women's employment opportunities in 22 countries. American Journal of Sociology111:1910-49.
32.
Oppenheimer, V.K.1997. Women's employment and the gain to marriage: The specialization and trading model. Annual Review of Sociology23:431-53.
33.
Orloff, A.S.1993. Gender and the social rights of citizenship: The comparative analysis of gender relations and welfare states. American Sociological Review58 (3): 303-28.
34.
Panayotova, E., and A. Brayfield.1997. National context and gender ideology: Attitudes toward women's employment in Hungary and the United States. Gender & Society11 (5): 627-55.
35.
Potuchek, J.L.1997. Who supports the family? Gender and breadwinning in dual-earner marriages. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
36.
Raudenbush, S.W., and A.S. Bryk.2002. Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
37.
Rubery, J., C. Fagan, and F. Maier.1996. Occupational segregation, discrimination and equal opportunity. In International handbook of labour market policy and evaluation, edited by G. Schmid, J. O'Reilly and K. Schömann.Brookfield, MA: Edward Elgar.
38.
Scott, J., D.F. Alwin, and M. Braun.1996. Generational changes in gender-role attitudes: Britain in a cross-national perspective. Sociology30 (5): 471-92.
39.
Soskice, David.2005. Varieties of capitalism and cross-national gender differences . Social Politics12 (2): 170-79.
40.
Thornton, A., and L. Young-DeMarco .2001. Four decades of trends in attitudes toward family issues in the United States: The 1960s through the 1990s. Journal of Marriage and the Family63:1009-37.
41.
Tichenor, V.J.2005. Earning more and getting less: Why successful wives can't buy equality. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
42.
Treas, J., and E.D. Widmer.2000. Married women's employment over the life course: Attitudes in cross-national perspective. Social Forces78 (4): 1409-36.
43.
United Nations Development Programme (UNDP).2005. Human development report. New York : Oxford University Press.
44.
Wilkie, J.R.1993. Changes in U.S. men's attitudes toward the family provider role, 1972-1989. Gender & Society7 (2): 261-79.
45.
Winslow-Bowe, S.2006. The persistence of wives' income advantage. Journal of Marriage and Family68:824.
46.
World Bank Group.2004. International finance corporation: Doing business database. http://www.doingbusiness.org/MethodologySurveys/EmployingWorkers.aspx.
47.
---. 2006. Gender stats: Database of gender statistics online. http://devdata.worldbank.org/genderstats/home.asp.
48.
Zuo, J.1997. The effect of men's breadwinner status on their changing gender beliefs. Sex Roles37 (9/10): 799-816.
